[sassyT]

[QUOTE]

I understand the laws of CHRISTIANITY THANK YOU.. I am telling you that they are contradictory of a God who loves unconditionally. I know what Jesus died for and I don't need a bible lesson from you. Believe it or not I grew up up with religion. Unfortunately, YOU cannot veer from the words of the bible and speak your truth from YOUR OWN HEART and YOUR OWN WORDS..

lol... these are not my words, this is from the Bible.

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

THE WAGE OF SIN IS DEATH? Even SAINTS DIE.. so whether you sin or not.. death is inevitable and neither you nor I know where the soul goes, YOU only know what YOU BELIEVE..

It is SPIRITUAL DEATH not physical death.. duh

Whether you accept CHRIST OR GOD, doesn't change the unconditional love for us.. so that is a rule set up by MAN to scare us into not sinning.. .
NOR does it change whether our soul goes on...
Being aware of something or not, doesn't make it less true.
We are loved simply because we exist, it doesn't matter if we love back or believe.

I take you dont believe in the Bible so I can't argue with what ever you beliefs are.

[lobrobster]

Lobro its as simple as this.

MoonlitWaves has been kind enough to try and explain some of this to me and either I am too stubborn, or too stupid to get it.

The Bible says the wages sin is death.God is holy and can not look upon sin and only the blood of an innocent lamb could remove this sin.
So God sent Christ as the sacrificial lamb for all man kind so that who ever accepts Him as savior, God gives him/her the power to become a child of God. Without the Blood of Jesus that he shed for our sin, we can not approach God because of our sin. God can not pretend we did not sin, that is why God sent his only Begotten Son Jesus to die in OUR place. So all we have to do is accept this gift of salvation He so freely gave. If we reject this Gift then we are destined to iternity of separation from God because of our sin.

This whole bit about God's thirst for blood, death, torture, and sacrifice just doesn't make sense to an objective observer. So my first problem is with this. I can't even move on until I understand how you can consider such brutal and torturous demands to be that of a loving god.

[De Maria]

No, but I would still be generous with my love towards him.

And God is. Because God is love.

I especially would not allow him to spend eternity in the worst suffering and agony imaginable.

How would you stop him?

How many parents counsel their children not to do drugs? Yet some do. And they go through hell and sometimes never come out.

How many parents counsel their children not to join gangs? Yet some do. And they live in hellish conditions and sometimes die there.

How would you prevent him?

Here's something you don't seem to be considering...

IF you are right... Then this earthly life is an imperceivable short amount of time. Would you let your toddler going through his 'terrible twos' dictate what he wants for himself? No matter how irritable and cranky he was, would you let his actions have eternal consequences?

Of course not. But we are not toddlers are we? We understand the choices we make. And that is what you are not considering.

Now consider that even a full 80 year life isn't even close to being proportionally equivalent to a two year old where eternity is concerned.

A comparison between 80 years and eternity doesn't even compute. But that isn't the issue. The issue is, do you understand the consequences of your actions.

An eighty year old does understand. A toddler doesn't.

And you also understand. Here's what I get from your message. You understand the will of God. You understand that if you do God's will you go to heaven but if you refuse to do God's will you go to hell.

But you don't like it. You don't want to do God's will and you don't want to go to hell either.

So you have a choice. Which do you hate most, hell or God's will?

Sincerely,

De Maria

[lobrobster]

How would you stop him?

How many parents counsel their children not to do drugs? Yet some do. And they go through hell and sometimes never come out.

How many parents counsel their children not to join gangs? Yet some do. And they live in hellish conditions and sometimes die there.

How would you prevent him?

I'm going under the presumption that God is omnipotent. That is, he is god and can extend his will. Wait! Before you say it...

I've heard about the free will argument. But certainly God could do something about the eternal hell thing. Maybe lessen the eternal torture of his own children a little. Do you think that's unreasonable?

But we are not toddlers are we?

Compared to who? Compared to god I would think we are much less than toddlers.

We understand the choices we make. And that is what you are not considering.

Some of us do. Others like me, obviously don't understand. You say one thing, a Hindu says another, a Muslim or Jew something else altogether different. So no... Many of us do NOT understand the choices we are making. According to you, over 2/3 of the world's population who aren't Christians don't understand.

And you also understand. Here's what I get from your message. You understand the will of God. You understand that if you do God's will you go to heaven but if you refuse to do God's will you go to hell.

Please try to grasp this, because I think it's very important...

I understand it insofar as it is YOUR point of view (or the Christian point of view). I also understand much of what is the Jewish point of view, and Muslim point of view. Added together, I do not understand it all, because you ALL can't be right! Does that make any sense to you? Just because YOU'RE convinced you're right, doesn't convince me, or Muslims, or Jews.

You don't want to do God's will and you don't want to go to hell either.

Trust me when I say that if I really believed there was a God, I would be more pious than almost anyone I know. That is, after I figured out which God I should worship and which religion I should practice.

Which do you hate most, hell or God's will?

This is a good question. I guess I most hate the notion that I and most of humanity will suffer for eternity when there was such little evidence for us to go on. If there is a hell, most atheists will not regret any decision they have made, but that god was such a trickster and never gave them any good reason to believe what they were supposed to. It would be such an easy thing to get me to believe. But it doesn't seem forthcoming for me.

[WVHiflyer]

This whole bit about God's thirst for blood, death, torture, and sacrifice just doesn't make sense to an objective observer. So my first problem is with this. I can't even move on until I understand how you can consider such brutal and torturous demands to be that of a loving god.

That's the kind of stuf that led me to the irrationality of a god. And don't forget torturing Job just to win a bet with Lucifer... How can I respect a being as so wonderful and omnipotent if it's got all the negative emotions we're not supposed to have? Jealousy, vengeance, pride, even insecurity...

[De Maria]

MoonlitWaves has been kind enough to try and explain some of this to me and either I am too stubborn, or too stupid to get it.

This whole bit about God's thirst for blood, death, torture, and sacrifice just doesn't make sense to an objective observer. So my first problem is with this. I can't even move on until I understand how you can consider such brutal and torturous demands to be that of a loving god.

That's exactly the same reason why I was once atheist myself Rob.

But now its simple to understand. God is omnipotent Lord. What God giveth God can take away.

And God doesn't thirst for blood. He thirsts for Love. He doesn't need it, He wants it for our good so that we can remain joined to Him for eternity.

Yes, God is a loving God.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[De Maria]

That's the kind of stuf that led me to the irrationality of a god. And don't forget torturing Job just to win a bet with Lucifer.... How can I respect a being as so wonderful and omnipotent if it's got all the negative emotions we're not supposed to have? Jealousy, vengence, pride, even insecurity....

There is jealousy and there is jealousy. To be jealous for the things which rightfully belong to you is not sin. It is justice.

To be jealous for the things that don't rightfully belong to you, that is sin.

The same can be said of vengeance. Vengeance achieved by the proper legal channels is approved by God. That is why the death sentence issued by legal authority is not sin.

However, vengeance of they type which does not secure the assurance of a trial to determine the guilt or innocence of the party being persecuted is surely a sin.

Pride. Is God proud? I've never heard that. God is humble and expects to be rightfully glorified for the wonderful things of this life. That is not pride, that is justice.

Insecurity? You'll have to explain that one. I have no idea how you attribute insecurity to God.

As for Job, you might read Job and follow his example. Ask God yourself, directly. God will answer.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[lobrobster]

And God doesn't thirst for blood.

Then how do you explain all the BLOOD?

Seriously De Maria, won't you (or somebody), please explain it? This is where you accuse non-believers of coming on here and causing trouble and being disingenuous. This is where the mods shut down threads because it gets ugly. But it is only a severe chasm that we stand on opposite ends of in our understanding of reality.

If God does not thirst for blood then how do you explain all the plagues he has descended onto man? The (required) hideous torture of His Son Jesus Christ? The psyche job he pulled on Abraham who was inches away from slitting his own son's throat? And so on, and so on, ad nauseam.

These are legitimate questions. Questions that the faithful seem able to put far out of their minds when it comes to the god they believe in and worship. In any other circumstance, you would quickly castigate anyone else who even thought such atrocities. Yet your own book states how God has thrived on them time and time again and you have no problem with it.

Can you at least understand why this seems like an incredible double standard to some people?

[Credendovidis]

Then how do you explain all the BLOOD?

De Maria won't. He can't. And he knows that...

Can you at least understand why this seems like an incredible double standard to some people?

He can't. Too difficult... Much easier to believe in wild religious claims...

:D

·

[De Maria]

Then how do you explain all the BLOOD?

As I said before, what God giveth God can take away. God gave us life, which is symbolized very well by the blood.

Seriously De Maria, won't you (or somebody), please explain it?

I have.

This is where you accuse non-believers of coming on here and causing trouble and being disingenuous.

No. You and I are having a very civil discussion.

People like Credendo for instance, all he says is, "You have no evidence" over and over ad nauseum.

Other non-believers simply come here to insult what they don't believe.

At least, you seem to be considering what I am saying. And you are asking incisive questions.

This is where the mods shut down threads because it gets ugly.

I don't think they'll shut you down, unless you start insulting all Christians because you disagree with them.

But it is only a severe chasm that we stand on opposite ends of in our understanding of reality.

Keep asking these questions and one day we'll be on the same side. I sincerely believe it.

As I said, I also became atheist because of questions such as these.

If God does not thirst for blood then how do you explain all the plagues he has descended onto man?

Simple. They were disobedient. They had made up their minds to do evil. So God, in His Justice, humbled them in order to give them the opportunity to turn to Him. Then, if they remained obstinately against Him, to protect His People, He eliminated them.

The hideous torture of His Son Jesus Christ?

This was done by men.

The psyche job he pulled on Abraham who was inches away from slitting his own son's throat?

No blood was shed here. It was a lesson that God does not want the sacrifice of our children as the Molochs and Baals, the false gods of the pagans of Abrahams did.

And so on, and so on, ad nauseam.

Be specific.

These are legitimate questions.

I agree.

Questions that the faithful seem able to put far out of their minds when it comes to the god they believe in and worship.

Only those who believe in a caricature of God. I don't. I believe in God All Mighty.

Psalm 138 7 Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy face? 8 If I ascend into heaven, thou art there: if I descend into hell, thou art present.

In any other circumstance, you would quickly castigate anyone else who even thought such atrocities.

I believe in justice. Therefore I believe in the God of Justice.

Evil people, like Stalin, and Hitler deserve the punishment they receive. If they never repented of the evil they committed, and they are in hell, so be it. It is just.

All who attack innocent blood, those who kill children in the womb and commit those atrocities and never repent but praise such behaviour also will reap what they sow.

Yet your own book states how God has thrived on them time and time again and you have no problem with it.

No it doesn't. You misunderstand the book.

Can you at least understand why this seems like an incredible double standard to some people?

Yes. I've been there.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[De Maria]

De Maria won't. He can't. And he knows that ...


He can't. Too difficult ... Much easier to believe in wild religious claims ...

:D

·

See what I mean Rob?

[De Maria]

I'm going under the presumption that God is omnipotent. That is, he is god and can extend his will. Wait! Before you say it...

I've heard about the free will argument. But certainly God could do something about the eternal hell thing.

There is only one Eternal Rob. Can you guess what or should I say, Who, that is?

Maybe lessen the eternal torture of his own children a little. Do you think that's unreasonable?

Not at all. Have you ever tried to comfort a child who doesn't want to be comforted?

Compared to who? Compared to god I would think we are much less than toddlers.

True. But you and I are not without understanding. We understand what we are saying. At least, I know I do. I understand that I have a choice. Do God's will or suffer the consequences. What is so difficult about that concept?

Some of us do. Others like me, obviously don't understand. You say one thing, a Hindu says another, a Muslim or Jew something else altogether different. So no... Many of us do NOT understand the choices we are making. According to you, over 2/3 of the world's population who aren't Christians don't understand.

Did I say that? No. That is how you characterize the situation. It is you who portray people as toddlers. I believe people have reason, understanding and free will.

Each one of those religious people that you mentioned have each viewed the evidence and decided they agreed with it.

And as I said earlier, I believe you also understand. You simply don't like the message being delivered.

Please try to grasp this, because I think it's very important...

Ok.

I understand it insofar as it is YOUR point of view (or the Christian point of view). I also understand much of what is the Jewish point of view, and Muslim point of view. Added together, I do not understand it all, because you ALL can't be right! Does that make any sense to you? Just because YOU'RE convinced you're right, doesn't convince me, or Muslims, or Jews.

That is exactly correct in my view. I was an atheist and convinced I was right. One day, I saw the error of my understanding. I then was convinced that God existed. But I still had a problem, if God exists, then who is worshipping God correctly?

I realized, as you have just expressed, that only one of them can be right, because they contradict each other therefore, they can't all be right at the same time.

I compared the evidence. I believe Christianity has the best. Four documented testimonies by three eyewitnesses and one investigator who interviewed eyewitnesses.

I compared the doctrines. I believe Catholicism has the best. The doctrines make sense and do not contradict.

That is how I came to be convinced that the Catholic Church is the true Church.

Trust me when I say that if I really believed there was a God, I would be more pious than almost anyone I know. That is, after I figured out which God I should worship and which religion I should practice.

Thank you. Now look at me. On every forum that I've been to, I'm considered very passionate and I leave no doubt in anyone's mind that I believe in God. Agree with me or not, I have yet to meet anyone that doubts my faith in God.

I trust that you will be the same when you come to believe in God. And I'm praying that you will. Your search for truth seems sincere.

This is a good question. I guess I most hate the notion that I and most of humanity will suffer for eternity when there was such little evidence for us to go on. If there is a hell, most atheists will not regret any decision they have made, but that god was such a trickster and never gave them any good reason to believe what they were supposed to. It would be such an easy thing to get me to believe. But it doesn't seem forthcoming for me.

Do you ever catch yourself talking to God? When I was atheist, I used to catch myself arguing with Him, telling Him how much I hated Him. I also challenged Him, "if you are there, show yourself!"

I have come to believe that this "prayer", if you can call it that, was answered. Try it. Talk to God and ask Him to show Himself to you. He will. For God wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim 2:4).

Sincerely,

De Maria

[lobrobster]

No. You and I are having a very civil discussion.

I'd like every discussion to be civil. But it's sometimes hard when two people are looking at the same wall and one calls it white and the other blue, and both are convinced their perception of the wall is correct.

Simple. They were disobedient. They had made up their minds to do evil. So God, in His Justice, humbled them in order to give them the opportunity to turn to Him. Then, if they remained obstinately against Him, to protect His People, He eliminated them.

Ok, but they ALL weren't disobedient. Certainly 3 month old babies weren't disobedient. And what do you mean by 'to protect his people'? I thought we were all children of God and therefore 'his' people? This might be my lack of understanding the bible. I know it is said that the Jews are His chosen people. But I thought we were all God's children. This is another thing that never made sense to me.

This was done by men.

Yes, men carried out the act. But almost everyone here agrees about the importance of a blood sacrifice. Sassy says: Without the Blood of Jesus that he shed for our sin, we can not approach God because of our sin. Surely, there had to have been a better way. And not to derail our discussion, but I've always wondered what would have happened if Pontius Pilate had been able to 'wash his hands' of Jesus and let him go? Would humanity be doomed now? I don't think you can have it both ways De Maria. You can't say the blood of Jesus' crucifixion was required AND that man did it in the same breath. Either man did it and Jesus didn't have to die, or Jesus had little to do with our being saved. It can't be both.

No blood was shed here. It was a lesson that God does not want the sacrifice of our children as the Molochs and Baals, the false gods of the pagans of Abrahams did.

Just the same it was pretty mean, don't you think? Not just to Abraham, but what about the kid? If someone held a knife to their kid's throat in 2008 I'm sure (I hope), you'd be among the first to suggest his immediate arrest. Lastly...

It sounds as though you might be saying, it's God's ball and he can play whatever game he wants with it. To some extent I agree with this. I'm not one of those atheists who claim I would spit at the feet of god even if I knew he existed (because to worship such a tyrant would violate my own moral code). The fact is, if this god is real then we are all living in his universe and we can either get with the program (no matter how gruesome we find it), or perish. That seems reasonable to me.

[hjpan]

I used to be a strong believer in Buddhism but I began to re-evaluate myself and became less religious. The reason is because I never really experience the reality and my mother keeps pushing the religion down on me; she's like "if you have premarital sex, you're going to hell because it's a crime" or "when you die, you will be judged based on your actions.. if you did a lot of good things, you'll go to heaven and vice versa."

I really don't know if Higher Power exists because I feel like there is no connection between human beings and the Higher Power; take granted for example, the AIDs, malaria, West Nile, rebel fighters, and unfortunate disasters strike all countries in Africa. But, the people believe in a Higher Power and not a lot has happened. Yes, there are miracles when rebel fighters retreated instead of running down on the next village or people with AIDs living a bit longer than expected.

I just don't see how a Higher Power can do this. Not to be blunt, but religion is over-rated. Look at Christianity and take a good evaluation of its history... When one disagrees, it branches off just like Protestants and Catholics.

I still believe there is a Higher Power, but not as strong as I used to.

[De Maria]

I'd like every discussion to be civil. But it's sometimes hard when two people are looking at the same wall and one calls it white and the other blue, and both are convinced their perception of the wall is correct.

Agreed.

Ok, but they ALL weren't disobedient. Certainly 3 month old babies weren't disobedient.

True, but 3 month old babies who have died are in heaven.

And what do you mean by 'to protect his people'? I thought we were all children of God and therefore 'his' people?

If you have rejected God, why do you consider yourself His?

This might be my lack of understanding the bible.

Agreed.

I know it is said that the Jews are His chosen people.

It is. God has always selected certain men to teach others about Him. Adam, Seth, the Patriarchs, Moses, Aaron, the Levites, the Prophets, the Apostles, the Church.

But I thought we were all God's children.

We are if we accept Him as our Father. But if we don't, then we are not part of His Family. We remain His creatures, but not His children.

This is another thing that never made sense to me.

No problem.

Yes, men carried out the act. But almost everyone here agrees about the importance of a blood sacrifice. Sassy says: Without the Blood of Jesus that he shed for our sin, we can not approach God because of our sin. Surely, there had to have been a better way.

Whether there is a better way I don't know. I know that this way is very effective.

Simple question. What do you share with your children? Answer, your flesh and blood.

Jesus, sacrificed Himself for us in order to share with us His Flesh and Blood. It is His Flesh and Blood which we eat in the Eucharist. In so doing He signifies and we accept that we are His Family. It is the New Covenant in His Blood.

And not to derail our discussion, but I've always wondered what would have happened if Pontius Pilate had been able to 'wash his hands' of Jesus and let him go? Would humanity be doomed now? I don't think you can have it both ways De Maria.

That depends on whether the Jews would then have accepted Jesus or crucified Him on their own.

If the Jews had accepted Jesus, then I believe the rest of the world would have as well.

But that is simply speculation since it didn't happen that way.

You can't say the blood of Jesus' crucifixion was required AND that man did it in the same breath. Either man did it and Jesus didn't have to die, or Jesus had little to do with our being saved. It can't be both.

I agree with your logic. That is why I don't believe that the Crucifixion was absolutely necessary.

Did I say that Jesus' crucifixion was required? Although many theologians believe it was. It is not Church doctrine however. Therefore we are free to speculate on the matter.

Nor is it Church doctrine that Adam and Eve had to sin. Many theologians believe that as well. But it is not Church doctrine and we are free to speculate either way.

Just the same it was pretty mean, don't you think? Not just to Abraham, but what about the kid? If someone held a knife to their kid's throat in 2008 I'm sure (I hope), you'd be among the first to suggest his immediate arrest. Lastly...

This is where faith comes in.

I, have learned from experience, from observation and from study, that God is Love, God is good and God does everything for our good.

Therefore, although I don't claim to understand why God tested Abraham this way, I know by faith that God did not do it to be mean.

How many times have you heard of someone being arrested for assault as an example? And people who love him say, "there's no way, he isn't capable of such behavior."

That is because, from prior experience they have learned that this person is good and they have faith in that person.

So, although I don't understand why God tested Abraham, I know because of my love for Him that He did it not only for Abraham's own good but for ours.

It sounds as though you might be saying, it's God's ball and he can play whatever game he wants with it. To some extent I agree with this.

To some extent that is true.

I'm not one of those atheists who claim I would spit at the feet of god even if I knew he existed (because to worship such a tyrant would violate my own moral code). The fact is, if this god is real then we are all living in his universe and we can either get with the program (no matter how gruesome we find it), or perish. That seems reasonable to me.

Bingo! Except I don't think God is a tyrant. I believe God is protecting you from a tyrant.

I don't know if you have children, but I do. And I find this the best metaphor for God, He is our Father.

How many times, if you have children or if you remember your childhood, did you resent the good that your parents enforced by tough love. You may not have thought they loved you when they spanked you, but they did and you know it is true now that you've grown up.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[lobrobster]

True, but 3 month old babies who have died are in heaven.

I hope these exchanges causes some of you guys to think a little bit as well...

You are implying that god created plagues to wipe out the innocent? The same can be said about every person on earth. Why not just destroy all of humanity and then everyone will be at their appropriate destination? It is an inefficient plan to say the least, to create creatures of life only to kill them even before cognizance is attained. This flies in the face of the 'perfectness' you attribute to god. If nothing else, his planning skills leave a lot to be desired.

It is. God has always selected certain men to teach others about Him. Adam, Seth, the Patriarchs, Moses, Aaron, the Levites, the Prophets, the Apostles, the Church.

So He has deceived his chosen people? Or least not provided them with sufficient evidence that Jesus was His Son? You know, some Christians believe His chosen people will burn in hell for all eternity because of this (not sure if you believe that).

Whether there is a better way I don't know. I know that this way is very effective.

By what criteria do you pronounce this tactic as effective? His Son was hideously tortured to death and well over 2/3 of all humanity that has ever lived since, do not even accept Jesus as their Savior. This is effective? Again, serious planning issues.

It is His Flesh and Blood which we eat in the Eucharist. In so doing He signifies and we accept that we are His Family. It is the New Covenant in His Blood.

I'm going to have to ignore this for now. It would take pages upon pages for you to explain how cannibalizing your Savior in the form of a cracker makes any logical sense.

How many times have you heard of someone being arrested for assault as an example? And people who love him say, "there's no way, he isn't capable of such behavior."

That is because, from prior experience they have learned that this person is good and they have faith in that person.

Right, but then we lock him up anyway, don't we? Because it doesn't matter what his loved ones say or think. If he is guilty of the assault, we correctly deem it wrong and punishable!

I don't know if you have children, but I do. And I find this the best metaphor for God, He is our Father.

I'm not sure if you really read what I write or not. If so, you should already know that this metaphor is wasted on me. I have already asserted that I would never shun my children. They could leave me, but I would always welcome them back if they choose. And no matter what they did, I would not sentence them to an eternity of torture and torment. And even if I did... I would commute their sentence in a heartbeat if they showed remorse and learned where they went wrong. No loving parent would accept eternal punishment for their child.

[De Maria]

I hope these exchanges causes some of you guys to think a little bit as well...

That is why I engage in these exchanges.

You are implying that god created plagues to wipe out the innocent?

Did I say that? Please quote me.

The same can be said about every person on earth. Why not just destroy all of humanity and then everyone will be at their appropriate destination? It is an inefficient plan to say the least, to create creatures of life only to kill them even before cognizance is attained. This flies in the fact of the 'perfectness' you attribute to god. If nothing else, his planning skills leave a lot to be desired.

Your logic is a bit distorted.

The idea is to give you and everyone else the right to choose. What good would it do do destroy everyone before they chose?

So He has deceived his chosen people? Or least not provided them with sufficient evidence that Jesus was His Son? You know, some Christians believe His chosen people will burn in hell for all eternity because of this (not sure if you believe that).

If you look at history, the majority of Jews have become Christians. The remainder are a remnant.

If they chose not to believe the revelation of God, it was their decision.

By what criteria do you pronounce this tactic as effective? His Son was hideously tortured to death and well over 2/3 of all humanity that has ever lived since, do not even accept Jesus as their Savior. This is effective? Again, serious planning issues.

Consider God to be the ultimate marine. He is looking for a few good men.

Remember God doesn't need us. We need Him. Even if we all choose to go to hell, it is our choice hurting no one but ourself.

I'm going to have to ignore this for now. It would take pages upon pages for you to explain how cannibalizing your Savior in the form of a cracker makes any logical sense.

That is fine. I can tell that your previously amiable discourse is now showing signs of frustration. Apparently you didn't anticipate that anyone had the answers to your questions.

Right, but then we lock him up anyway, don't we? Because it doesn't matter what his loved ones say or think. If he is guilty of the assault, we correctly deem it wrong and punishable!

And that is the difference isn't it. God is not guilty of assault.

I'm not sure if you really read what I write or not. If so, you should already know that this metaphor is wasted on me. I have already asserted that I would never shun my children. They could leave me, but I would always welcome them back if they choose.

The key words here are "if they choose".

And no matter what they did, I would not sentence them to an eternity of torture and torment. And even if I did... I would commute their sentence in a heartbeat if they showed remorse and learned where they went wrong. No loving parent would accept eternal punishment for their child.

A lot of "ifs" there. If they repented. If they show remorse.

That puts you in exactly the same situation as God. Since God will do the same thing. The only people in hell are those who do not repent.

Sincerely,

De Maria

[lobrobster]

Did I say that? Please quote me.

You didn't say it. You implied it, which is why I said 'you are implying...'

I asked about God's thirst for blood. You responded by saying, Simple. They were disobedient. They had made up their minds to do evil.

I then asked about God wiping out innocents and babies. You acknowledged no problem with this whatsoever, because they go straight to heaven. So which is it? What was the purpose of these plagues and floods that God wrought? Did he mean to wipe out evil doers, or innocents? Or were all these innocents merely the 'collateral damage' of God's wrath? You'd think an omnipotent God would have more accuracy than that.

What good would it do do destroy everyone before they chose?

No offense, but you appear to be talking out of both sides of your mouth. This overtly contradicts what you just got done saying about my logic and about 3 month old babies. Does it not?

Remember God doesn't need us.

Now I've never heard this before. God *needs* us? Clearly, he doesn't need all of us. Just how many does he need? Would a few million do? Or just a couple of very pious people? I know this sounds facetious, but I really don't understand. If he needs us, what did god do for the billions of years before he created man?

I can tell that your previously amiable discourse is now showing signs of frustration.

My discourse is still very amiable. I just don't want to put you through having to answer transubstantiation. First, the process in which a cracker becomes the body of Jesus, and then the whole cannibalism thing. That just sounds like a very messy topic that would utterly derail this thread.

A lot of "ifs" there. If they repented. If they show remorse.

You are still missing my entire point. There is NOTHING, N-O-T-H-I-N-G, that my children could do that would cause me to stand by while they suffered eternally. Nothing.

That puts you in exactly the same situation as God.

Not really. I seem to have more compassion. Unless there's still something I'm not understanding.

[WVHiflyer]

Interesting debate. Mostly I've tried to stay out of it. You 2 are doing well enough. But...

Remember God doesn't need us.

If God doesn't need us, why does he demand we worship Him - not request, demand?


-

[N0help4u]

How does he demand he gave you free will and you exercise that free will by not worshiping him.